Specifics of Concluding Cross-Border Copyright Agreements between Counterparties from Russia and Ethiopia (within BRICS)

Russia and Ethiopia are members of BRICS and consider intellectual property rights turnover as an important area of cooperation. The cumulation of norms of national legal orders in the field of copyright and contract law has made it possible to establish similarities and differences in regulation. Ethiopia is not a party to international copyright agreements, but its law is largely harmonized with the core conventions (the Berne Convention of 1886 and the Universal Copyright Convention of 1952). At the same time, there are discrepancies with Russian law that must be taken into account in contractual relations between persons of the states: discrepancy in the qualification of the contract of alienation of exclusive rights; different requirements for the essential terms of the license agreement; absence of conflict of laws regulation in Ethiopia in the sphere of intellectual and contractual statuteе. Ignoring the identified problems can lead to the vulnerability of cross-border contracts on the disposal of exclusive rights — non-conclusion, conflict of conflicts, and limping relations. The absence of a conflict of laws regulation in Ethiopia makes it ineffective to choose a state court as the forum for resolving a dispute arising from a cross-border copyright transaction. There are many reasons for this, including the lack of an agreement between states on the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments. Since States are parties to the 1958 New York Convention, it is advisable for parties to a transaction to choose international commercial arbitration. This will also make it possible to choose the law applicable to contractual relations and count on the recognition and enforcement of a foreign arbitration award.